Ministry of Innovation —

Horrifically bad software demo becomes performance art

Live software demos often go awry, but what happens when the mayhem is …

For software developers, live product demonstrations are a way of life, and that means that "live product demos gone horribly awry" are also a fact of life. But what if the world's most disastrous software demo was faked, foisted on a set of unsuspecting computer science students as a piece of performance art?

That thought is what led University of California-San Diego student Tristan Newcomb to produce a half-hour of surreptitious theater that he calls "The Last Lecture." Students stare at the stage in disbelief, amusement, and horror as a software developer comes to class with his two assistants and proceeds to demonstrate a new videogame in spectacular fashion—software crashes, lag problems, puppet videos, and falling computers all coincide with the presenter's personal breakdown in which he questions his life's work and worries ceaselessly about his death (a death in which no Kermit the Frog will welcome him to the afterlife).

Only after 30 minutes of increasingly bizarre personal confessions and technical glitches is the gag revealed; credits suddenly begin to scroll up the gigantic demonstration screen at the front of the classroom. The audience slowly realizes that it has been watching not a software demonstration, but a half-hour prerecorded video fronted by three actors.

"Software demonstration as performance art" first occurred to Newcomb back in 2004, when he was working with other students to create an actual videogame. As development proceeded and demonstrations were required, the group came up with an idea to just fake the game and use prerecorded video clips in place of a live demo, all of which would be secretly launched from a DVD; real computers would be brought to class but only for use as props.

The recording began with a minute and a half of a fake blue screen of death. While this was displayed, Newcomb filled the dead time with fake biographical credits and odd cultural ramblings about Muppets in the UK. The more times he did it, the weirder the information became.

People believed every word he said, and why wouldn't they? These were real UCSD classes, and this software presentation had been vetted and introduced by the course professor. To Newcomb, the software demonstrations that were so prevalent in the computer science program began to seem like a "little privileged theater space," a powerful place to communicate "amazingly intense monologist details." In other words, software demonstration as one-man show.

At first the idea was simple comedy. It quickly morphed into something more, something that violated "all unwritten rules of software demonstration" by faking everything from the software being demonstrated to each word that came out of the presenter's mouth. The idea was to have the audience "endure it" as the presenter's life falls apart in front of them, along with his software. The "Valhalla-like collapse" of the demonstration appears to invalidate everything that the presenter says, and it shows him up as a total incompetent or (worse) as a pathetic fraudster.

Professors are in on the scheme, providing Newcomb and his assistants access to UCSD computer science classes. The piece has been run several times, each time further developing the character of the presenter, a self-absorbed loser who encapsulates everything that can go wrong in a career as a software developer.

Newcomb plays the role of presenter, apparently relishing the uncomfortable situation in which he is placing the audience, but he always makes sure that they understand the stunt at the end. When the presenter finally worries about the uselessness of his life and that fact that he will see only his socks at the foot of the bed when he dies, end credits begin to roll on the screen behind him. The audience generally pauses, trying to "reverse engineer everything they've seen for 10 or 15 seconds" before they figure out just what it is they have been watching.

"This has now been stamped as fiction," says Newcomb, adding that the audience is most often "incredibly relieved" that the demo wasn't real. It's uncomfortable to watch someone experience such a crisis right in front of you, and in a public setting, especially someone who appears to be a "genuinely tortured" person. The reveal therefore comes as something of a relief; Newcomb describes it as "people stepping off a roller coaster," and he hopes that they enjoyed the ride.

The hoax element of this approach won't work for long, of course. Word gets around quickly. Newcomb is now considering a plan to take the "failed software demo" idea into the traditional theater, where audiences know exactly what they're in for. He hopes to further develop the character, possibly turning the failed software demo into some type of (fake) infomercial.

He has recorded "The Last Lecture," offering it freely online and recognizes that it has very limited commercial possibilities. But even if he can't profit from the entire crazy experiment, that's okay; to Newcomb, it's one of the "last little punk rock things that are left to do" in life.

I thought it was good. It seems like it needs a little bit more refinement though. Some pacing problems to the whole thing and almost a little too short. Hopefully they keep working on this, it's a pretty interesting project.

I turned it off after the bit calling Randy Pausch's Last Lecture fake. Guess I'm getting old since I found that to be in very poor taste...and I've laughed at the dead baby joke threads here. Probably bothers me more since I found Randy's lecture to be pretty incredible.

Calling this "The Last Lecture" is a travesty. I hope this means that the presenters have never heard of Randy Pausch's superb lecture of that name. (Anyone who hasn't, should Google and watch it). Otherwise, I'd conclude that they were either trying to increase their publicity by using his coat tails, or perhaps somehow they are poking fun at it as well. If the later, their sense of humor is warped.

I like this idea in theory, but most people are too nice to really enjoy watching a person's misfortunes explode all around him. This concept could be far funnier if it was more obviously outlandish, and a lot less painful if ir were less woeful, but as it is I think it's a good idea that didn't really get pulled off.

I like that he's going to be moving to audiences who know what they're getting into, and that will force him to be funnier, as well. As it stands now, 30 minutes of pain to reveal one very simple punchline at the end is not so great actually.

Originally posted by chronomitch:I think some of you are missing the point. The fake demo itself is not supposed to be funny. The real joke is on the audience, who squirm as they watch a pathetic, tortured soul fail again and again.

Which is why I'm surprised no-one has kicked this artdork's ass. Ha-ha, the joke's on me?! Give me back my tuition, shithead.

There's definitely something good here, but it's unpolished, in my opinion. It hits true to life, but I think the performance needs some refinement to better mix the slapstick (crashes, uncooperative assistants, hardware mishaps) with the psychological (the speaker's breakdown, the interjected videos to placate the audience, the audience's reaction itself). It seemed to weigh too heavily on the psychological part. It also runs a bit on the lengthy side.

EDIT: Ah, I see Targ8ter already pretty much summed up my opinion on this. Well, then!

quote:

I like this idea in theory, but most people are too nice to really enjoy watching a person's misfortunes explode all around him. This concept could be far funnier if it was more obviously outlandish, and a lot less painful if ir were less woeful, but as it is I think it's a good idea that didn't really get pulled off.

Oddly enough, I find far fewer people concerned about wasted time or tuition refunds on nights when a class is canceled suddenly and everyone gets another week to work on their project.

Yeah, note that no-one got up and left and no-one complained when he said that he wanted to get them out of there earlier.

Honestly, that had more value that a lot of the BS I slept through in classes.

I think you are an old fuddy duddy if you think the Last Lecture thing is too much (and have actually watched it instead of a knee jerk reaction), but the point is to set the presenter up as a miserable and neurotic person who is always the downtrodden one.